![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#51
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Doug
Given that it's fairly well centered I'm surprised it's not a 5.5. |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Eric Brehm
That's a good question -- it would cost me $250 to get it reviewed by PSA, but it might be worth it if there's a good chance they would award the 5.5. From what I've seen and heard, PSA has not been giving away those half-grade bumps easily. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Doug
For what it's worth, I just sent mine in for review last week and it didn't get a bump. I'd say yours probably has a better argument though. All I got was a new holder for $100 + about $50 in shipping costs both ways. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Eric Brehm
Ok, Doug, thanks again for the suggestion, I hadn't really even thought of it. I I'll probably go ahead and give the review a shot, and I'll report the results here. |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: JohnnyH
Wow Eric that card is sick, how is that not a 6 !! No way that is a 5 it is just to nice !! |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Doug
I don't see why it didn't get a 5.5 to begin with since it's in one of the newer holders already. Good luck with it if you send it in. I wouldn't be brave enough to do it myself, but you might have a better chance if you cracked it first. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Eric Brehm
I don't know if the new flip style with "EX" and "5" on separate lines was introduced at the same time as the new half-grade system, or slightly earlier, but Doug you're probably right that this card likely was graded when the 5.5 was already available, and thus not awarded in this case. On the other hand, from the stories I've heard, sending a card in for grading or review more than once often produces different results. With a card like '52 Mantle though, it is very expensive every time you do it, since they require that you pay for a higher service level based on the value of the card. Tough game to play. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Posted By: Doug
From what I understand, they started the separate line labeling the same time as the half grades so you could tell if a card was graded before or after the new system. Your card looks like it has a better shot at a bump that mine did, but I kind of wonder if submitting it in the new style holder may have caused them to skip over it instead of giving it a better look. I could see it going either way but I saw a 3.5 '52 common that had worse creasing than my Mantle and it didn't seem to keep it from getting a bump. I was hoping for a 3.5 when I originally crossed it over from the BVG holder, but that was a bit of a strange experience in itself. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Want Topps Mickey Mantle Cards | Archive | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 9 | 08-03-2008 08:25 AM |
1933 Goudey Babe Ruth, 1956 Topps Mickey Mantle, 1953 Bowman Color Mickey Mantle for trade | Archive | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 4 | 04-07-2008 06:48 PM |
FS: Mickey Mantle Cards | Archive | 1950 to 1959 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 0 | 12-19-2007 09:09 AM |
Help with Mickey Mantle Rookie Cards | Archive | Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions | 18 | 11-21-2007 05:55 AM |
Wanted Mickey Mantle Cards | Archive | 1920 to 1949 Baseball cards- B/S/T | 1 | 03-31-2006 01:09 PM |